Re: repomd format

On Tuesday 28 November 2006 06:43, seth vidal wrote:
> It didn't, really. The other aspects of the defined format never really
> caught on and then we kinda drifted a bit. To be fair this list and the
> discussion have languished over the last year or so mainly b/c I've been
> busy with other items and haven't had as much time to spend on them. If
> you're interested in cleaning up items like this, or if anyone is, let
> me know. I'll be glad to give interested/motivated people who would like
> to help clean this up access to do just that.

Yes, I will be certainly interested in helping defining the format. We did 
some extensions in SLE10 products and I would like to have them upstream. 
Also, it would be nice to have a defined standard plus the new changes 
documented so implementations can be sure what part of the standard they 
implement.

Duncan